SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Mad) 485

P.JYOTHIMANI
M. V. Sachidanandam – Appellant
Versus
Prakash Kumar & Others – Respondent


For the Petitioner:Usharaman for G.R. Swaminathan, Advocates. For the Respondents:D.N. Vimalnathan for A. Sumathy, Advocates.

Judgment :-

Sixth defendant in the suit is the revision petitioner in both the revisions, which are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The respondents 1 and 2 have filed the suit in O.S.No.89 of 2003 for partition in respect of D Schedule property into 36 shares and to allot 5 shares to each of the plaintiffs, for mesne profits and injunction from alienating the D Schedule property to any person including the 6th defendant. The D Schedule property is the building and sight measuring East West 10 fts, North to South 40 fts. to the extent of 400 sq.ft. The business was started by the great grandfather of the family of plaintiffs in the name of Sri Krishna Stores, is one of joint family business even though it is called as partnership. The plaintiff’s father the first defendant has been doing business till the second defendant stopped going to school. The second defendant was only assisting the business and was married to the third defendant Mrs.Sonal, who ailed from a poor family. The 4th and 5th defendants are paternal aunts of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs’ father when demanded partition, the grandfather of the plaintiffs has sent him away, who has started a busi


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top